ArticleDer Chirurg; Zeitschrift fur alle Gebiete der operativen Medizen2016
[Pioneering surgical innovations in Germany : Part 1: generation of medical evidence].
Article in Der Chirurg; Zeitschrift fur alle Gebiete der operativen Medizen, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Origin of prefabricated frozen elephant trunk.Annals of cardiothoracic surgery · 2025Review
- [Medical Device Regulation as current challenge for the legally safe introduction of new technologies].Der Chirurg; Zeitschrift fur alle Gebiete der operativen Medizen · 2018Review
- Review
- [Weaknesses of studies in surgery must not be overlooked].Der Chirurg; Zeitschrift fur alle Gebiete der operativen Medizen · 2016Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundIn recent years research which conforms to evidence-based medicine (EBM) has been required even in surgery. Prospective, randomized studies are carried out in order to provide justification for the benefits of new procedures.
objectiveThe acquisition of special features in surgery with respect to the application of EBM. MATERIAL AND
methodsThe investigation period selected was from1933 to 2013; therefore, all disciplines within the German Society of Surgery were questioned on the achievement of revolutionary innovations. The investigation was carried out utilizing personal interviews and a questionnaire. Only novel methods which were developed in Germany were considered. The survey was completed by carrying out research in database files.
resultsDuring the past 80 years 15 pioneering innovations have been published in surgical research, although the prerequisites of EBM were only partly met. They appear to be based on the lowest level of evidence as these methods were mostly published as case reports or case series in journals with a low impact factor. DISCUSSION: In general, innovative surgical procedures through top level research are still being published in the form of case reports or case series. This allows a rapid distribution of research results to the surgical community. Controlled studies still do not represent an alternative for the introduction of pioneering surgical innovations.
Indexed as
Identifiers
27090414What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.